There is a consensus on the spirit and purpose of the bill, but sometimes the devil is in the details, or in the lack of details.
The minister talked about the project-based approach, which he did not seem to advocate for the larger envelope. However, again in a context of accountability and performance, if there is a beginning, a middle and an end, there is a greater chance that the money provided will help to achieve the objective of revitalizing languages, whether it's Cree, Innu or any other.
The minister refused to tell my colleague David Yurdiga how much it would cost. Without telling me how much it will cost, can you tell me how the money will be used? How will Canadian Heritage ensure that there will be results, that indigenous languages will be saved and that we will not be chucking money out of the window without results? That's a colourful expression and I'm being a little harsh, but I'd like to know what it looks like. We are being asked to approve the bill and the funding associated with it, but no one can tell us how much it will cost or how the money will be spent. This puts us in a tricky situation.